Jesus was a "Muslim"

page: 8
20
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by Anonymousman
 





Jesus is mentioned in the Quran more than is Muhammad. He is called the ‘Word of God’ and the ‘Spirit of God’, but most often, ‘the son of Mary’. In the Quranic narrative he is not crucified.


And yet Muhammad claims Allah has no partner. Uh, Spirit of God = God. Word of God = God. Muslim say he is not the Son of God and yet even the Hebrew bible proclaims God does indeed have a Son.



Jesus may have been a "muslim", but only in the same sense as Adam was, as Abraham was, and as I am - the broader sense of the term, not the niggling particulars that take away from the worship of God. He in no way had any part of what has come down to the modern day as Islam, the legalistic totalitarian worship of a distant and unapproachable deity.

What you say here is a good point, and has always bothered me. Mohammed says that "God has no partner", and so goes on to remove the office of messiah from Jesus, while at the same time insisting on giving him the title. Islam makes of Jesus a "Messiah" in name only. Then, after insisting that God has no partners, Mohammed goes on to insist that in order to get to heaven, one must obey not only God, but His prophet as well - not plural "prophets", but the singular "Prophet", meaning none other than Mohammed himself. If God has no partners when it comes to the prophet Jesus, then how is it he suddenly develops a partner in Mohammed?

Is the requirement to obey Mohammed also, rather than God alone not forcing a partner on God? It appears to me that Mohammed had aspirations to marginalize and replace Jesus. it further appears that modern Islam is pushing the same agenda, which is to be expected, all things considered. After all, Mohammed IS the prophet of origin for modern Islam.

Even the Shahada puts Mohammed in partnership with God: "God is great, there is no God but God, and Mohammed is his prophet" that MUST be recited in order to become a modern muslim. One cannot do so without placing Mohammed alongside God.

In contrast, Jesus never demanded obedience to him - instead, he said that one must sell all he has, take up his cross, and follow Jesus. make one's own track, in his steps, but not a word about obedience.

Touching upon the concept of the trinity, I've never seen a biblical verse in support of it. I note that one poster claimed there was one that was taken out, but I've never seen it, nor do I have any idea how it could have been construed to support a trinitarian concept. As near as I can tell, the trinitarian doctrine was a heresy introduced at Nicea, something like 300 years after Christ, and was hotly contested at the time, only carrying the day because of political support from secular powers, not from any sort of Godly deliberation.

I tried to get through this thread without saying anything at all. I really did. It seems I've failed.

edit on 2012/10/3 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by shuar911
reply to post by FlyersFan
 

You refuse to investigate what is the "Meaning" of islam. Islam was established at the hand of muhammad. islam was there since adam. You're absurd statement is quite ridiculous.

There was no 'adam'. Islam was invented hundreds of years after Christ by Muhammed ... a caravan thief and a murderer of political opponents. There is no deeper meaning. Jesus was not Muslim. YOUR absurd statement is quite ridiculous.



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by moonsighter
 


Here's your Trinity ... Matthew 28:19 - New International Version (NIV) - Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

Here's the writings of the earliest christians on the Trinity ... click here



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Deetermined
 




When the day comes where I see someone call themselves a "Muslim" and yet they denounce anything and everything that references Muhammad, then I'll believe you. But I won't hold my breath.


Will you also denounce Jesus when you see someone who calls himself a Christian, yet does the exact opposite of what Jesus taught?



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 




The crescent moon and star has ben a part of arabic culture for thousands of years, even before Gideon's time. Yes that's right, Gideon an israelite came into contact with that symbol before.

Judges 8:21-22

21 So Zebah and Zalmunna said, “Rise yourself, and kill us; for as a man is, so is his strength.” So Gideon arose and killed Zebah and Zalmunna, and took the crescent ornaments that were on their camels’ necks.



I'm going over the KVJ version of that statement and I read...



21 Then Zebah and Zalmunna said, Rise thou, and fall upon us: for as the man is, so is his strength. And Gideon arose, and slew Zebah and Zalmunna, and took away the ornaments that were on their camels' necks.


Correct me If I'm wrong.. but I thought the KJV is the most respected version of the bible.

Heres what other versions of the bible states...

The NIV states...
21 Zebah and Zalmunna said, “Come, do it yourself. ‘As is the man, so is his strength.’” So Gideon stepped forward and killed them, and took the ornaments off their camels’ necks.

The New Living Translation states...
21 Then Zebah and Zalmunna said to Gideon, “Be a man! Kill us yourself!” So Gideon killed them both and took the royal ornaments from the necks of their camels.

The New Century Version states...
21 Then Zebah and Zalmunna said to Gideon, "Come on. Kill us yourself. As the saying goes, 'It takes a man to do a man's job.' " So Gideon got up and killed Zebah and Zalmunna and took the decorations off their camels' necks.


21 Then Zevach and Tzalmunna said, Rise thou, and fall upon us; for as the ish is, so is his gevurah. And Gid’on arose, and put to death Zevach and Tzalmunna, and took away the ornaments that were on their camels’ necks.


Which version are you using?


edit on 3-10-2012 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 




What is His name, and what is His Son’s name,
If you know?




I didn't quote anything out of context. Questions have answers. Proverbs 30:4 tells you plainly God has a Son and even asks you what his name is.


How about I go by the bible....and quote Luke 3:38 and say that the bible teaches that Adam is "the son of God".

Is it wrong when I say Jesus is a "son of God"... in the same way as Adam is a "son of God"?



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by logical7
 




You have a strange attitude, how you know "He only has ONE NAME"?
Besides why did Jesus(pbuh) addressed him as FATHER? even in Lord's prayer"our FATHER.." so if ONE NAME only, then the prayer needs to be altered.


Ask him why Jesus shouted out "Eloi, Eloi,.... why have you forsaken me"... instead of "YHWH, YHWH, why have you forsaken me"



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 




but Jesus is GOD INCARNATE

Then you imply that Mary was the mother of God.
Now....go up to a protestant and tell them that....and then see what he thinks of you



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 




Interesting that God would command Moses and Israel to proclaim his name to the nations but he didn't care for Muhammad to know what his name was


Jesus' last words on the cross...

"Eloi, Eloi....."

Say it out loud.... "Eloi" sounds a whole lot closer to "Allah".



He did decide what his NAME is, he gave it to Moses and he gave only one name. and that name was not Allah. Nice try deflecting, but titles are not names. He only has ONE NAME.

And what name did Jesus cry out when he was nailed to the cross? "YHWH"?



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Deetermined
 




Islam even changed the definition of what "Messiah" was, therefore denying it.


Actually, its the Christians who have changed the definition of Messiah.
The Jews believed he would be a human being. Islam is true to the jewish definition of "messiah".... in the sense, he was supposed to be a human.

The Jews have the correct definition, but missed the messiah.
The Christians have the messiah, but are wrong on the definition of "messiah".
The Muslims, have the messiah.... AND have retained his absolute humanity.... as defined by those who came up with it.



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Deetermined
 




The Qu'ran is nothing more than a twisted Bible. There is no unique story told by Muhammad. He took what he already knew and changed it.


Its like saying Christians took over the scriptures of the Jews and twisted it to include concepts such as "trinity", "original sin" and Jesus' divinity.

Bad news....You are in no position to accuse anybody else of twisting somebody elses scripture.



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by logical7
 




There is a difference between a symbolic/loving address to a person as a "son" n a literal one.


The next time you come across a christian talking about Jesus being the "son of God", just show them Luke 3:38.... Even Adam is called "son of God".




posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by WarminIndy
 




Is this the same Moses, the brother of Aaron, that Mohammed said Mary, the mother of Jesus was Aaron's sister?


Is David the father of Jesus?
Then why does the Bible call Jesus the "son of David"?



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 





Here's your Trinity ... Matthew 28:19 - New International Version (NIV) - Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.




19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,'


So when Jesus was alive, and walked the earth, he instructed his disciples to avoid the gentile towns....but after he rose from the dead... he was suddenly interested in his disciples preaching to the gentiles??

You sure you don't see anything wrong with this?
edit on 3-10-2012 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by WarminIndy

Originally posted by logical7

Originally posted by WarminIndy

Originally posted by logical7

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by logical7
 




To be polite, i'l let you have that and ya now i get you better. But then why would Muhammad(pbuh) twist bible and make getting followers harder? As if they dint have enough trouble from pagan meccans. And later annoy jews in medina and make them enemies?


In my personal opinion, Muhammad was rebelling against the notion that Isaac's descendants would be the ones who were able to lay claim to Abraham's inheritance. Although God promised to make the Ishamelites a great nation, He made it clear that the inheritance was meant for Isaac's descendants.

I'm sure there were plenty of Ishmaelites who were willing to fight for what they thought should be theirs and follow Muhammad to claim it for themselves, regardless of what enemies he made in the process. He had to discredit Jesus, as Jesus was a descendant of Isaac.

Just like we see today. The Middle East is still fighting over the inheritance.

ya that makes sense(sarcasm) and it also makes sense to have a chapter on Mary, defend her honour.
And ya discredit Jesus(pbuh) by accepting virgin birth, miracles and that he is Messiah.
Just not agreeing to a blasphemy that he is god, interestingly Jews stand with muslims on this. They use the same alleged divinity claim of christians to deny him as Messiah.
Jews know their text and know Messiah is not god and neither can Messiah die till he fulfils his job.
Christians say he is messiah, god and also died(wow dint leave anything)
Muslims say he is messiah, not god, dint die
.
I wonder who makes more sense..


The Quran even has a surah about a yellow cow. What is wrong with this surah..is that the cow in question was actually RED and for the RED HEIFER CEREMONY. How could Mohammed miss that one....

Wait....Mohammed never wrote the quran, his followers did..So Uthman got it wrong.

I ain't giving Mohammed credit for the Quran, because he didn't write it...

this is translation by George Sale
.
2:69 They said, pray for us unto thy Lord
that he would shew us what colour
she is of. Moses answered, he saith,
she is a red cow, intensely red, her
colour rejoiceth the beholders.



Sahih International Surah 2:68-69 They said, "Call upon your Lord to make clear to us what it is." [Moses] said, "[ Allah ] says, 'It is a cow which is neither old nor virgin, but median between that,' so do what you are commanded."They said, "Call upon your Lord to show us what is her color." He said, "He says, 'It is a yellow cow, bright in color - pleasing to the observers.' "


Sahih says yellow. Then who is right? Sale or Sahih?


Sahih International Surah 2:71 He said, "He says, 'It is a cow neither trained to plow the earth nor to irrigate the field, one free from fault with no spot upon her.' " They said, "Now you have come with the truth." So they slaughtered her, but they could hardly do it.


Here is the corresponding account from the Bible...

KJV Numbers19:1 And the Lord spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying, 2 This is the ordinance of the law which the Lord hath commanded, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, that they bring thee a red heifer without spot, wherein is no blemish, and upon which never came yoke:


The Temple Institute gives the explanation for the red heifer ceremony. The Quran writers should have gotten it correct.

And this is what George Sale had to say about Islam..

As Mohammed gave his Arabs the best religion he could, preferable, at least, to those of the ancient pagan lawgivers, I confess I cannot see why he deserves not equal respect, though not with Moses or Jesus Christ, whose laws came really from heaven, yet with Minos or Numa, notwithstanding the distinction of a learned writer, who seems to think it a greater crime to make use of an imposture to set up a new religion, founded on the acknowledgment of one true God, and to destroy idolatry, than to use the same means to gain reception to rules and regulations for the more orderly practice of heathenism already established.


Hmm, it appears that the man you chose to use as a source, does not legitimize Mohammed at all.

i used the man exactly for that reason. A translation from a critic.



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


I agree with you that Jesus(pbuh) is a muslim in essence like Adam,David,Moses(pbuthem)
.
From where do you get Messiah=divinity? Actually its the opposite, ask any of our Jew friends.
And about obeying prophet, ya its only obeying God, but as the commands are relayed through a prophet then obeying him is obeying God and thats true for any prophet. How can one obey God and accept a message but reject the messenger?
And about Jesus(pbuh) not demanding obedience, did you mean its literal "follow me"? Or rather, imitate my example, do what i say, in short"believe and obey"



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 11:57 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 




Touching upon the concept of the trinity, I've never seen a biblical verse in support of it. I note that one poster claimed there was one that was taken out, but I've never seen it, nor do I have any idea how it could have been construed to support a trinitarian concept. As near as I can tell, the trinitarian doctrine was a heresy introduced at Nicea, something like 300 years after Christ, and was hotly contested at the time, only carrying the day because of political support from secular powers, not from any sort of Godly deliberation.


Interpret these verses any way you want, but I think it all leads to the same conclusion:

1 John 5:5-12

5 Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?

6 This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.

7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

9 If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son.

10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.

11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.

12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

This isn't the only place in the Bible that brings all of these together. Jesus does it himself several times throughout the entire New Testament.

Now, whether or not people want to believe that God/Jesus/Holy Spirit is actually one, these verses make it very clear that without all three, you have nothing. They all bear witness/record of one another. If you don't have one, you don't have the other two. If you discredit one of them, you discredit them all. They work together to create eternal life, just as spirit, water and blood all have to work together to create a physical life here on earth.

Here's the dilemma as it relates to Muslims. If they don't believe that Jesus is who God said he was, they have nothing. The only one that bears witness to us to confirm that Jesus was actually the Son of God is the Holy Spirit. Without the Holy Spirit to witness and confirm this, as part of our faith, there is no faith and once again, there is nothing. No eternal life. To know one, you have to know all of them, and you have to believe what they said about each other. They are record of each other.

Jesus couldn't have been more clear about this. Here's how it works:

John 6:63-65

63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.

65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

And what is it in verse 65 that is "given unto him of my Father"? It's the Holy Spirit. The only way to get to Jesus is through the Holy Spirit, that it given to people by God. How do we know that?

John 10:25-30

25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.

26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.

27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.

30 I and my Father are one.

How do the "sheep hear my voice"? Through the Holy Spirit.

It's a three step process, regardless of whether they are the same entity or not.

And obviously, from verse John 6:66, not everyone is going to be happy about. One leads to the other.

A keyword search for "Holy Spirit", "Holy Ghost" and "Spirit of God" in the Bible will confirm many more.



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by Deetermined
 




When the day comes where I see someone call themselves a "Muslim" and yet they denounce anything and everything that references Muhammad, then I'll believe you. But I won't hold my breath.


Will you also denounce Jesus when you see someone who calls himself a Christian, yet does the exact opposite of what Jesus taught?



Well, there you go!

There is no separating "Muslim" from the Islamic religion of Muhammad, therefore, neither Adam nor Jesus could have been Muslim!

You answered it for yourself!!



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n

The next time you come across a christian talking about Jesus being the "son of God", just show them Luke 3:38.... Even Adam is called "son of God".



The next time you look up Bible verses, notice the difference between "son of God" and "Son of God". There's a difference in capitalization when referring to Adam versus Jesus.



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Deetermined
 


the verse John 5:7 (refering to trinity) was removed by bible scholars as it was a fabrication from RSV bible. And understandably there was an uproar and many denominations demanded it back or refused to buy that HERATIC bible. Lol. The publishers had a choice to be true and starve, guess what they did..
So trinity is popular opinion and not a scholistic fact(its actually forgery)
edit on 3-10-2012 by logical7 because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
20
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join